From the Argus Leader and other sources the next hearing in the matter of the accusations against former State Senate candidate Joel Koskan have been moved to March 12:

Koskan was originally scheduled to be arraigned Monday morning, but his court date was moved to 9:30 a.m. March 13, 2023.

and..

While a proposed plea agreement was filed in court in November following the allegations, signatures on the paperwork were dated in September before Koskan was formally charged with child abuse.

In the plea agreement, all prison time would be suspended for Koskan if he agreed to plea guilty. Felony child abuse typically comes with a 10-year prison sentence.

Read the entire story here.

I think we’re also still waiting to see where things end up with the rape charges filed against House candidate Bud May.

 

Thune, Wicker Call Out U.S. Commerce Department IG for Neglecting Mandated Broadband Oversight Duties
“Contrary to the requirements of the law, you have failed to fulfill your duties required by Congress.”

WASHINGTON — U.S. Sens. John Thune (R-S.D.), ranking member of the Subcommittee on Communications, Media, and Broadband, and Roger Wicker (R-Miss.), ranking member of the Senate Commerce Committee, today sent a letter calling out U.S. Department of Commerce Inspector General (IG) Peggy Gustafson for failing to fulfill mandated congressional oversight of previously authorized broadband funding. As a result of IG Gustafson’s dereliction of duty, taxpayer dollars intended for broadband services are subject to waste, fraud, and abuse.

“Contrary to the requirements of the law, you have failed to fulfill your duties required by Congress,” the senators wrote. “This is deeply concerning for two reasons: [First,] [the National Telecommunications and Information Administration] has a long and well-documented history of misusing federal dollars when attempting to expand broadband access; and [second] your office has had a significant and ongoing problematic history. Further, Congress has recently heard testimony of funds being used to overbuild existing broadband networks which makes it even more alarming your office would disregard its oversight responsibilities.”

Earlier this week, Thune launched a nationwide broadband oversight effort that will review numerous broadband programs spanning several federal agencies. The primary goal of Thune’s effort is to hold these agencies accountable and ensure that previously authorized broadband funding is being used in the most efficient way possible to protect taxpayer dollars. Thune recently sent a letter to a diverse group of stakeholders, including broadband associations, public interest groups, and free market think tanks to seek their input on the current broadband regulatory structure.

Full letter below:

The Honorable Peggy E. Gustafson
Inspector General
U.S. Department of Commerce
1401 Constitution Avenue NW
Washington, D.C. 20230

Dear Inspector General Gustafson:

As you know, the National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA), housed under the Department of Commerce, is a major driver in fulfilling the Department’s mission to provide reliable broadband services to all Americans.

One of the numerous programs aimed at closing the digital divide is NTIA’s Tribal Broadband Connectivity Program (TBCP).  Established under the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2021 (P.L.116-260), the TBCP has received nearly $3 billion in funding to support broadband deployment, telehealth, distance learning, broadband affordability, and digital inclusion in Tribal areas. NTIA awarded its first grant under the program on November 16, 2021, and to date, the agency has provided roughly $1.5 billion to over 100 projects.

To ensure taxpayer dollars are used in the most efficient manner possible, Congress required the Commerce Department’s Inspector General (IG) to review TBCP grants awarded by NTIA and make recommendations to address any waste, fraud or abuse with respect to these grants. Specifically, the IG is required to provide its recommendations and report no later than six months after the first TBCP grant was awarded and every six months thereafter. Thus, based on the timing of TBCP grants awarded by NTIA, the first IG report was due on May 16, 2022, and a second report was due on November 16, 2022.

Contrary to the requirements of the law, you have failed to fulfill your duties required by Congress. This is deeply concerning for two reasons: 1) NTIA has a long and well-documented history of misusing federal dollars when attempting to expand broadband access; and 2) your office has had a significant and ongoing problematic history. Further, Congress has recently heard testimony of funds being used to overbuild existing broadband networks which makes it even more alarming your office would disregard its oversight responsibilities.

Please provide a specific timeline by Friday, December 16, 2022, as to when Congress will receive your recommendations as mandated by Congress. We urge you to carry out the duties Congress has entrusted to your office.

Thank you for your attention to this important matter.

Sincerely,

###

This just rolled through my facebook feed. Welcome to the new reality where pop up clinics appear at local bars and lounges so people can get their medical marijuana cards:

From sdsos.gov, the masthead for the South Dakota Secretary of State’s website is now updated, and showing signs that a new Secretary of State is in office:

What other changes will we see? I did catch in one of her speeches that Secretary Johnson mentioned we should have greater campaign finance disclosure to allow donors to be searchable on the SDSOS website. Which I found extremely interesting, as the capability was there at one point, only to be removed.

The ability to search donors across the entire system was put in place after Secretary of State Jason Gant took office back in 2011, in the form of the “C.A.S.H.” system as implemented by the office at the time:

For open government and those who research donations, it was revolutionary and an absolute boon. The problem? Legislators hated it. They really hated it.

In the start, legislators were required to go into the system and key their donations in, or upload a spreadsheet. This represented a big change to the procedure under Chris Nelson as Secretary of State where they just sent in a paper form.   Change is hard, especially for those in the legislature who lean away from the younger portion of the age scale.  There was resistance in going fully electronic from some. Another part was that was for the system to automatically account and to trigger reporting when you hit the $100 threshold for reporting. So it required all small donor amounts to be put in the system, and that also brought pushback from those who didn’t like the smaller donors being entered.  And, there was a person or two who didn’t care for the disclosure that the system brought, because the system also provided the same transparency to Political Action Committees.  If you were juggling things across several PACS, it made it pretty easy to ferret that out, and there were those who didn’t like that.

After some time battling complaints of those who held the purse strings, there were changes made.  Paper forms could be submitted if so desired, and they would be entered into the C.A.S.H. system, keypunched by SOS employees. But the handwriting was on the wall with enough elected officials disliking aspects of the new system.

When Secretary of State Shantel Krebs took office, the entire system was shelved, and a system put in place that at the time had worse lookup capability than what was available under SOS Nelson, and would pull up the once again paper forms that legislators would mail and fax in. Since it’s earliest form, the system has been slightly improved and refined in the eight years it has been in operation, but at it’s heart, it is largely a simple lookup tool for paper forms.

A decade later, we’re now back full circle. With landmines that I suspect are still there, but still a call for voters wanting to have the ability to know more about our elections.

If Secretary of State Monae Johnson wants to improve the system as she has mentioned with greater disclosure, there are a few hurdles she has to cross, mainly in how she would get the information in, and who would do the input? And how to make it user friendly.

But, increasing transparency and open government is always a good thing.

Gov. Noem Calls for Immediate Review of State Investments

PIERRE, S.D. – Today, Governor Kristi Noem called for an immediate review of all investments under the control of the South Dakota Investment Council in order to determine if taxpayer dollars are being invested in companies that pose a threat to our national security, like those in Communist China. She challenged the Investment Council to complete the review in 7 days.

“South Dakotans deserve to know if their taxpayer dollars are being invested to benefit the Chinese Communist Party,” said Governor Kristi Noem. “The Investment Council has ensured that South Dakota has the best-funded pension in the country. But it is not possible to make good deals with bad people. If this review shows that such investment is taking place, then the Investment Council should propose alternative investment options.”

Last week, Governor Noem signed an Executive Order banning TikTok for South Dakota state government.

This week, Governor Noem wrote in the Wall Street Journal, “Many American intelligence officials believe that the Chinese Communist Party poses the greatest threat to the U.S., and most American people agree. If [President] Biden won’t take this threat seriously, then Congress and state governments must fill the gap.”

###

Had someone send this over to me last night.

Apparently in late October while the rest of us were working on the election, former 2014 US Senate Republican Primary Candidate and State Senator (2017-2019) Stace Nelson was on facebook announcing some life changes:

Thune: Biden Administration’s Radical ESG Policies Have Real-World Impacts

“Between higher energy prices and higher food prices, the kind of financial hardship Americans have been experiencing during our current inflation crisis could become a fixture for the long term.”

Click here or on the picture above to watch the video.

WASHINGTON — U.S. Sen. John Thune (R-S.D.) today expressed his concerns regarding President Biden’s far-reaching environmental, social, and governance (ESG) agenda. Thune noted that the administration has failed to examine the impact ESG policies will have on the price of food and energy, and he warns that these overreaching regulations could result in serious consequences for essential industries within our economy.

Thune Urges President Biden to Be Honest About Real-World Costs of Climate Agenda

“As our nation continues to grapple with record-high inflation, administrative actions that increase prices should be the last thing on your agenda.”

WASHINGTON — U.S. Sen. John Thune (R-S.D.) today led his colleagues in calling out President Biden and his administration for forcing their radical environmental, social, and governance (ESG) policies onto the American economy in pursuit of their unrealistic environmental agenda. The letter highlights various actions by financial regulators that threaten to choke off certain industries’ access to capital, which could increase the price of food and energy for businesses and families in the midst of record-high inflation.

“All of these actions have real-world impacts that your administration would be well served to evaluate,” the senators wrote. “For instance, establishing rules, strategic plans, and principles to coerce financial institutions and other firms to limit their lending and exposure to certain businesses drives up prices on consumers. Choking off access to capital for companies in the energy sector in an attempt to decimate the fossil fuels industry drives up the cost of fuel and electricity at a time of record costs, further stoking inflation. Discouraging lending to farming and ranching communities in an attempt to reduce natural livestock emissions strains supply chains and increases the cost of food. Therefore, it would be prudent for your administration to actually take the time to evaluate the costs its actions are directly and indirectly imposing on American businesses and families, as well as conduct the necessary analysis as required by the Regulatory Flexibility Act. As our nation continues to grapple with record-high inflation, administrative actions that increase prices should be the last thing on your agenda.”

The letter was also signed by U.S. Sens. John Barrasso (R-Wyo.), Marsha Blackburn (R-Tenn.), Mike Braun (R-Ind.), Shelley Moore Capito (R-W.Va.), Kevin Cramer (R-N.D.), Ted Cruz (R-Texas), John Hoeven (R-N.D.), Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa), Ron Johnson (R-Wisc.), Cynthia Lummis (R-Wyo.), and Roger Wicker (R-Miss.).

In July, Thune led his colleagues in introducing the Food and Energy Security Act, legislation that would prohibit the Biden administration from forcing its ESG agenda onto the American economy. It would also require federal financial regulators to analyze the impact of their rules on businesses that are involved in the agriculture or energy supply chains and how those rules could affect food and energy prices for consumers. Thune recentlycalled on the White House to examine the impact that its radical ESG policies will have on the price of food and energy before imposing these new rules and costs on American families.

Fox News recently highlighted Thune’s effort to hold the Biden administration accountable for pursing ESG policies.

Full letter below:

The Honorable Joseph Biden
President of the United States
1600 Pennsylvania Avenue Northwest
Washington, D.C. 20502

Dear President Biden:

As we turn to a new Congress in a few weeks, we write to draw your attention to our ongoing concerns with your administration’s unrealistic environmental agenda and focus on government-imposed environmental, social, and governance (ESG) initiatives. While businesses may elect to pursue their own ESG agendas as part of a free-market society, the heavy-handed imposition from the federal government will have (and in some cases, already has had) negative real-world impacts on our economy and American families, especially by deepening the ongoing energy and inflation crises.

In the nearly two years since you were sworn into office, your administration has made countless efforts to push through its sweeping environmental agenda through the financial regulators. These efforts, though sold by administration officials as steps necessary to mitigate climate risks, are solely an attempt to strong-arm financial institutions and other firms into choking off capital to industries that are foundational to our nation’s economy, yet are continually villainized by the far left.

One example of your administration’s overreach is the Securities and Exchange Commission’s (SEC’s) proposed climate-disclosure rule that would not only require registrants to disclose information about their greenhouse gas emissions, but, in many cases, indirect emissions from upstream and downstream activities (i.e., their suppliers and customers) in their value chain – known as scope 3 emissions. Scope 3 emissions are not produced or even controlled by the regulated organization, making this rule entirely unworkable for any public company to comply with. The rule would also require registrants to comply with new financial impact metric disclosure requirements and determine the effects of certain climate-related events on each line item of their consolidated financial statements. The rule would almost certainly reduce or potentially even eliminate businesses’ access to the resources they need to operate, as it would discourage firms from investing in or extending capital to them. The SEC rule would be destructive for businesses in the energy and agriculture sectors, but to businesses, in particular small businesses, across all sectors of our economy as well.

Equally alarming is the recently proposed Federal Supplier Climate Risks and Resilience Rule that would similarly require certain federal contractors to publicly disclose not only their greenhouse gas emissions, but scope 3 emissions, compounding the burden imposed by the SEC. Ultimately, private companies would be disincentivized to apply for these federal contracts altogether, which would increase project costs for the federal government and harm taxpayers.

Unfortunately, your administration’s efforts to use financial regulators to force through an unrealistic environmental agenda do not end there. After joining the Network of Central Banks and Supervisors for Greening the Financial System, an organization with the stated agenda of “mobilizing mainstream finance to support the transition toward a sustainable economy,” the Federal Reserve announced a pilot program to analyze the climate-related financial risks for the nation’s largest banks. The Office of the Comptroller of the Currency, the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, and, most recently, the Federal Reserve have all published draft principles for climate-related financial risk management for large banks. The Department of Labor just finalized a rule that would, in practice, require pension fiduciaries to consider climate change and ESG factors in making investment decisions, irrespective of their pecuniary relevance. And last, but certainly not least, the National Credit Union Administration published a since-rescinded strategic plan that seemed to recommend credit unions need to alter their field of membership and loan offerings in farming communities.

All of these actions have real-world impacts that your administration would be well served to evaluate. For instance, establishing rules, strategic plans, and principles to coerce financial institutions and other firms to limit their lending and exposure to certain businesses drives up prices on consumers. Choking off access to capital for companies in the energy sector in an attempt to decimate the fossil fuels industry drives up the cost of fuel and electricity at a time of record costs, further stoking inflation. Discouraging lending to farming and ranching communities in an attempt to reduce natural livestock emissions strains supply chains and increases the cost of food. Therefore, it would be prudent for your administration to actually take the time to evaluate the costs its actions are directly and indirectly imposing on American businesses and families, as well as conduct the necessary analysis as required by the Regulatory Flexibility Act. As our nation continues to grapple with record-high inflation, administrative actions that increase prices should be the last thing on your agenda.

Of course, financial institutions and other firms need to be mindful of their exposure to and concentration in certain industries to ensure safety and soundness. However, your administration must recognize that, though these ESG-type regulatory actions are generally targeted at the nation’s largest financial institutions and Wall Street firms, they have a trickledown effect on our nation’s community banks and credit unions that are feeling the pressure from Washington. These entities, which are essential for economic opportunity and stability across the country, are concerned about how your administration’s myopic environmental agenda could impede their ability to lend to their clients and foster the growth necessary to steer our economy away from a recession. And in rural communities, community banks and credit unions are acutely wary of how your administration’s overreach could harm their ability to lend to their agriculture clients.

As you head into the second half of your current term, it is vitally important that your administration, prior to taking action and pumping out rules, actually look beyond the beltway and take into account the real-world impacts that financial regulators’ environmental actions have on businesses, families, and community banks and credit unions across the nation. This common sense is long overdue.

Sincerely,

###

INTERIM JOINT COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS TO MEET

PIERRE – The Interim Joint Committee on Appropriations will hold their seventh meeting of the 2022 Interim on Wednesday, December 14, 2022, at 10:00 a.m. (CT). The meeting is being conducted via electronic conference and in Room 362 of the State Capitol in Pierre, South Dakota, to allow for both remote and in-person participation. The Interim Joint Committee on Appropriations is co-chaired by Representative Chris Karr (R-Sioux Falls) and Senator Jean Hunhoff (R-Yankton).

Among the items that will be discussed are Letter of Intent Reports and the Family Support 360 program. Public testimony will also be taken. The full agenda is available online.

In addition to Representative Karr and Senator Hunhoff, committee members include Representatives Linda Duba (D-Sioux Falls), Mary Fitzgerald (R-Spearfish), Randy Gross (R-Elkton), Steven Haugaard (R-Sioux Falls), Taffy Howard (R-Rapid City), Liz May (R-Kyle), John Mills (R-Volga), and Tina Mulally (R-Rapid City); and Senators Bryan Breitling (R-Miller), Brock Greenfield (R-Clark), David Johnson (R-Rapid City), Jack Kolbeck (R-Sioux Falls), Ryan Maher (R-Isabel), Reynold Nesiba (D-Sioux Falls), Maggie Sutton (R-Sioux Falls), and John Wiik (R-Big Stone City).

-30-